Resumen
Recent progress in model-robust designs has focused on maximizing estimation capacities. However, for a given design, two competing models may be both estimable and yet difficult or impossible to discriminate in the model selection procedure. In this paper, we propose several criteria for gauging the capability of a design for model discrimination. The criteria are then used to evaluate a class of 18-run orthogonal designs in terms of their model-discriminating capabilities. We demonstrate that designs having the same estimation capacity may differ considerably with respect to model-discrimination capabilities. The best designs according to the proposed model-discrimination criteria are obtained and tabulated for practical use.

Resumen
Supersaturated designs are an increasingly popular tool for screening factors in the presence of effect sparsity. The advantage of this class of designs over resolution III factorial designs or Plackett–Burman designs is that n, the number of runs, can be substantially smaller than the number of factors, m. A limitation associated with most supersaturated designs produced thus far is that the capability of these designs for estimating g active effects has not been discussed. In addition to exploring this capability, we develop a new class of model-robust supersaturated designs that, for a given n and m, maximizes the number g of active effects that can be estimated simultaneously. The capabilities of model-robust supersaturated designs for model discrimination are assessed using a model-discrimination criterion, the subspace angle. Finally, we introduce the class of partially supersaturated designs, intended for use when we require a specific subset of m1 core factors to be estimable, and the sparsity of effects principle applies to the remaining (m-m1) factors.